Shenandoah University’s Going Global: First Year Seminar
The University’s Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) focuses on preparing first year students to become responsible global citizens through a seminar designed for first time, first year students. The course, entitled Going Global: First Year Seminar (FYS), uses integrative learning experiences and community building components to achieve three learning outcomes: multiple perspectives; global awareness; and personal engagement.
I. Initial Goals and Intended Outcomes
FYS – a three credit, multi-disciplinary first semester seminar – is the initial step in developing a sense of community among all first time, first year Shenandoah students. This community begins within the borders of the University, but the goal of the seminar is to expand these borders and deepen students’ feeling of belonging to the global community, helping Shenandoah students realize they can make a difference in that global community. This goal is derived from the university’s mission to “educate and inspire individuals to be critical, reflective thinkers committed to making responsible contributions within a community, nation and world.” Additionally, embedded in the FYS purpose is the university’s core value of “respect for diverse cultures, experiences, and perspectives.” The importance of the seminar to the educational goals of the university is reinforced by its inclusion as a required course in the “Individual in the World” domain of the general education program.
FYS piloted in Fall 2008 with two sections and fully launched in Fall 2009 with twenty-four (24) sections. Classes were limited to eighteen students and taught by full-time faculty members from across the campus at a common time to enable students to take advantage of program-wide opportunities. Student mentors assisted each faculty member to help first year students with the transition to college. A lecture series on global topics and common summer reading was planned to achieve the goal of global competency. The original learning objectives and outcomes for the QEP were:
Multiple perspectives: the ability to develop multi-cultural interpretations using diverse forms of expression within a global context
1. Assess multi-cultural perspectives and make meaningful comparisons using diverse forms of expression within a global context (final work).
2. Practice cultural traits that are different from one’s own cultural perspective.
3. Explain one’s own cultural perspective and make meaningful comparisons to other cultures.
4. Recognize the interdependence of cultures in domestic and global terms while identifying patterns of thought and behavior that contribute to the formation of a culture different from one’s own
Global awareness: the ability to employ an inter-active and inter-dependent perspective to demonstrate a global concept through course-specific activities (i.e., common readings, guest lectures, special events, and field trips).
1. Critique one’s own cultural and social identities and evaluate how those identities shape beliefs and attitudes
2. Analyze a global issue from an interactive and interdependent perspective
3. Articulate a personal philosophy of responsibility while promoting world-view mindfulness through course assignments and student action plan
Personal engagement: the ability to evaluate multiple perspectives and global awareness through personal engagement in academic and co-curricular activities.
1. Validate and report personal engagement in academic and co-curricular activities while demonstrating multiple perspectives and global awareness (i.e., number of activities attended).
2. Create a student action plan that illustrates multiple perspectives and global awareness.
II. Significant Changes made to the QEP and Reasons for Changes
The following changes were made to the QEP over the past five years: 1) discontinued the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress (MAPP) as a baseline data assessment tool; 2) eliminated summer reading requirement; 3). altered number of FYS sections and size of classes each year; 4) included permanent, part-time instructors as part of the FYS Faculty;
-1-
5) replaced Student Action Plans with required signature assignments for common events; 6) revised the common event requirement and 7) clarified original learning objectives and wording on the original program rubric.
1. Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress (MAPP): Prior to the adoption of the current general education program in 2002-03, the University utilized the Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress (MAPP) Test to assess student progress. MAPP was administered during first- year student summer orientation and then again as a stand-alone examination during final examination week for all graduating seniors. As the general education program evolved and more specific assessments developed within each objective of the program, we continued to utilize MAPP as a supplement. In 2011-12 we ceased to use MAPP because we developed an assessment procedure more specific and applicable to our general education curriculum. In addition, we recognized some methodological limitations with administering MAPP two days before graduation, and we questioned the validity of the data gathered.
2. Summer Common Reading: Incoming students in 2009 were assigned to read the Pulitzer Prize-winning collection of short stories, The Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri. The FYS Advisory Board chose to remove the summer common reading assignment as a program requirement after Fall 2009 professors and students reported in surveys and focus groups dissatisfaction with the requirement. The objective of the reading was to initiate common conversation on global issues among the incoming class, but the Fall common event lecture series satisfied that same objective. Students and professors complained that both the common reading and lecture series took too much time away from the individual course. Consequently the summer reading requirement was not implemented after the Fall 2009 semester.
3. FYS Sections: The initial plan stated that 24 FYS sections would be offered each year and class sizes would be capped at 18. The numbers of sections fluctuate each semester, ranging from 22 – 25, depending on faculty availability. The class size ranges from 15 – 23, depending on university enrollment and the number of sections offered.
4. FYS Faculty: The FYS Advisory board voted to allow part-time faculty to teach in the FYS program if they already held a standing position at the University and if their course proposal met the FYS learning objectives. Two part time faculty have taught in the program over the last five years and both are part of the Conservatory. This occurred because the Conservatory faculty course loads did not allow flexibility to teach FYS, but we still wanted representation from the conservatory — so we opened up the opportunity to standing part time faculty (professionals within their creative field with an established reputation at SU) to get more diversity in the program.
5. Replaced Student Action Plan: The QEP initially planned to use individual student action plans as direct assessment measures of student personal engagement in their global learning. Students were to develop action plans in FYS that demonstrated how they applied a multiple perspectives and global awareness outlook in co-curricular activities during their first year and how they planned to incorporate these objectives into co-curricular activities throughout their college experience. This narrative analysis was to continue throughout the college experience. The FYS Advisory Board examined a sample of student narratives in Fall 2009 and found the students were not reaching high levels of learning that went beyond comprehension level answers. The board determined that students needed more direction and decided that beginning in 2010, student narratives based on co-curricular activities must be in response to questions aligned with the FYS learning outcomes. Signature assignments based on a menu of common co-curricular events replaced the Student Action Plan.
6. Common event requirements: FYS faculty attend workshops every May to review programming and assessment requirements. Surveys from the Spring 2010 and 2011 workshops indicated that the co- curricular common events distracted from the individual course content and the signature assignments were problematic. The FYS Director addressed this issue by opening up sponsorship of common events to individual FYS sections in Fall 2010, thus bringing speakers and events directly related to individual class topics and ultimately decreasing the required number of common events attended from four events to three, with class field trips allowed as one substitution.
-2-
In addition, starting in Fall 2010 the professor(s) sponsoring the event worked with the Assessment Coordinator and FYS Director to construct assignment questions on common events that specifically aligned with the FYS learning outcomes. Thus, the events themselves and the assignments became more closely tied to individual courses and the goals of the program.
7. Learning Objectives and Program rubric: The first FYS faculty workshop in Spring 2009 included multiples sessions where faculty created a common FYS program rubric. The FYS faculty undergoes rubric norming sessions annually and revisions to the objectives and rubrics are made accordingly. The integrity and meaning of the learning outcomes remain unchanged, but the revisions have allowed faculty to apply the rubric more easily to their students’ work and be more consistent program-wide. (See Appendix 1 for the original rubric and the revisions for use in Fall 2014).
III. The Impact of the QEP on Student Learning
The QEP’s impact on student’s global learning is evident in the following: Global Citizenship Project applications; Signature Journal Assignment responses; Global Perspective Inventory results; and National Survey of Student Engagement scores. A summary table of QEP goals, outcomes, initiatives, and improvements based on assessment results can be found in Appendix 2.
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP PROJECT (GCP): Of particular significance noted in the assessment results is the sharp increase in Global Citizenship Project applications among Freshmen once FYS partnered with the Office of International Programs in 2010 to feature the GCP in specific common events.
| Academic year | # of Freshman GCP applicants |
| 2006-2007 | 21 |
| 2007-2008 | 33 |
| 2008-2009 | 23 |
| 2009-2010 | 27 |
| 2010-2011 | 49 |
| 2011-2012 | 64 |
| 2012-2013 | 73 |
| 2013-2014 | 54 |
GCP is an opportunity for students to travel abroad during spring break each year with an academic focus in a group oriented and faculty led experience. Recent destinations included Rwanda, Paraguay, Malaysia, Nepal, Romania, and Costa Rica. Freshman applications consistently outnumber the number of applications received from upperclassman. The applications are due in September, at the beginning of the FYS program. The results indicate that incorporating aspects of the GCP into FYS common events has a significant impact on students’ interest in traveling globally with the GCP. Please note that QEP started in 2009 and the common events aligned with GCP started in 2010.
FIGURE 1: GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP APPLICANTS (GCP): PRE & POST QEP
Signature Journal Assignments: Students write a signature journal assignment in connection with each common event. A sample of signature journal assignments is collected each semester and evaluated by the FYS Advisory Board using the program rubric (see Appendix 1).
-3-
The results are reported back to the FYS faculty and contribute to an ongoing, systematic development of the FYS program. The board examined a sample of journal entries in Fall 2009 and found the students were not reaching levels of learning that went beyond the comprehension in Bloom’s Taxonomy. In 2009, professors were not given direction regarding assignments based on the common events. The FYS Board revised the signature assignments in 2010 where faculty sponsoring the common event worked with the Director of Assessment to create a menu of journal questions for each common event where the questions aligned with the global awareness and multiple perspectives learning outcomes. The quality of students’ responses significantly improved.
For example, in 2009 we simply asked students to reflect on Rwandan culture after listening to a speaker discuss on orphan program in Rwanda. We got one-line responses, such as “Rwanda has a diverse culture and it helps the people in many ways.”
In 2010, we revised the questions to align more specifically with learning objectives. One of the questions addressing multiple perspectives asked students to “Compare and contrast our culture to that of the culture in Rwanda. Judge how social identities shape many of the traditions in Rwanda and in the culture at Shenandoah University. Make sure you include your opinions for how social identities shape our beliefs and values within our own culture.” This is an example of a 2010 student entry based on the revised question:
Rwanda’s culture and our culture at Shenandoah University are diverse in many ways. Social identities shape many of the traditions in Rwanda an in ours as well. The intergroup relationships direct life in Rwanda. For example, the relationships between the tribes and also within the men and women within the tribes are resentful. Men are considered superior and have control over the woman’s decisions. When comparing this to our culture I find many areas that are not similar. When looking at this culture from a different perspective I can see why woman [sic] are not dominant human beings and depend on the men to make their decisions. If this happened in our culture, many things would change. For example, there would not be that many women in the workforce, they would be at home waiting for their husbands to tell them what to do next. I think this would change the workforce in America because there are a lot of woman [sic] who are now working in corporations and businesses. How would a typical classroom change if woman [sic] were not present in schools?
The signature journal assignments from 2010 onward moved students from a comprehension level on Bloom’s taxonomy to an evaluation level. Sample journal responses from 2010-2013 indicate higher levels of learning than achieved the initial year. Students not only summarized what took place in the common events, they applied this new knowledge to their own view and their own cultures and then predicted and evaluated how things might be different if various cultural traditions were prominent in their own cultures. The journal submissions reveal several findings. Most students were successful at critiquing their own cultural and social identities while understanding how these identities shape their beliefs and attitudes. Students were able to approach cultures that are different from their own culture in non-judgmental ways while determining how cultural traits and traditions affect their personal philosophies. Beginning in 2014, the FYS Advisory Board will collect a random sample of signature assignments and quantify the percentages of students proficient in the three learning objectives.
The Global Perspectives Inventory (GPI): The GPI has been used to collect baseline data on student multiple perspectives, global awareness and personal engagement in each FYS class during the first two weeks of the Fall semester since 2009. The GPI is administered again in each FYS class during the last two weeks of the Fall semester. The pre- and post- data is compared every year. The Global Perspective Inventory “reflects a global and holistic view of student learning and development and the importance of the campus environment in fostering holistic student development” (gpi.central.edu). The GPI consists of six scales, two from each domain: Cognitive, Intrapersonal, and Interpersonal. The cognitive domain explores ways of knowing with greater complexity. The Intrapersonal Domain focuses on one becoming more aware of and integrating one’s personal values and self- identity. The Interpersonal Domain focuses on social interactions and social responsibility. Questions in the Cognitive and Interpersonal domains specifically align with the QEP learning objectives.
-4-
Questions in the “cognitive knowledge domain” reflect the QEP’s multiple perspectives and global awareness objectives:
- I am informed of current issues that impact international relations.
- I understand the reasons and causes of conflict among nations of different cultures. I understand how various cultures of this world interact socially.
- I know how to analyze the basic characteristics of a culture.
- I can discuss cultural differences from an informed perspective.
The 4-year average mean score for SU students on the above scale before taking FYS (PRE-data) is a 3.38 and the POST data reports the average norm rising to a 3.66 (out of a 5-point Likert scale, with the 5 as strongly agree). In comparison to freshman attending public and private four-year institutions who completed the GPI from 2010-2013, the average norm for the cognitive knowledge scale is a 3.57. (See footnote 1 below)
FIGURE 2: GPI 4-Year PRE-POST Average for Cognitive Knowledge Scale: SU compared to freshman peer group.
Thus, SU freshman scored lower than the freshman average norm at other universities prior to taking FYS, but higher than the average norm after taking FYS. (See footnote 2 below)
The Interpersonal Social Responsibility Scale aligns with the QEP’s personal engagement learning objective:
- I think of my life in terms of giving back to society
- I work for the rights of others
- I put the needs of others above my own personal wants
- I consciously behave in terms of making a difference
A comparison of scores reveals a more global perspective among students from PRE to POST QEP for Social Responsibility over four years and a higher score than the Freshman peer comparison group after completing the QEP.
_________________________________________
1 Norms for Global Perspective Inventory Report, 2013 -2014 Edition, https://gpi.central.edu/supportDocs/Norms.pdf, pp. 10 -11.
2 2009 is not included in the 4-year average norm data because the Global Perspective Inventory Report, 2013-2014 Edition only includes data from August 2010 to May 2014. We can report results from peer institutions in 2009 on individual questions, but not as part of the 4-year average.
-5-
FIGURE 3: GPI 4-Year PRE-POST Average for Interpersonal Social Responsibility Scale: SU compared to freshman peer group.
If we take a closer look at individual questions and compare PRE and POST data, the impact of the QEP becomes even more evident. Questions such as “I see myself as a global citizen” (figure 4) show a consistent increase in students’ multiple perspective and global awareness pre- and post FYS from 2009- 2013.
FIGURE 4: I see myself as a global citizen.
For all 5-years, the average mean score for PRE inventories remains consistent, with little to no increase or decrease. POST inventories reveal that students are moving from neutral to agree when viewing themselves as a global citizen after participating in the QEP.
A similar trend is clear in response to the question, “People from other cultures tell me that I am successful at navigating their cultures” (FIGURE 5). These PRE mean scores range from a 3.0 to 3.53, and the POST scores show a consistent increase from neutral to agree with a gain of .77 (from 3.53 to 4.3) in 2013.
FIGURE 5: People from other cultures tell me that I am successful at navigating their cultures.
-6-
Over the past 5 years, freshman consistently scored higher on the GPI POST survey than PRE survey. The one exception is in the area of religious and spiritual traditions, shown below in Figure 6. The question, “I am accepting of people with different religion and spiritual traditions” has shown a consistent decrease.
FIGURE 6: I am accepting of people with different religious and spiritual traditions.
In response to this decline, the FYS program started including at least 2 sections focused on religion beginning in 2012 and incorporated a program on religious tolerance into the common event menu. The trend is still decreasing so this area is still under review but the issue now will be addressed also in the general education curriculum (see section IV).
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE): In addition to administering the GPI, the university has Freshmen and Seniors complete the NSSE at the end of every spring semester. Questions relating to “diverse perspectives” on NSSE indicate a rising trend since the QEP was fully implemented in 2009, and a significant spike from 2008 – 2009 when the QEP pilot was launched. Students answered questions that included SU’s impact on their understanding of race and ethnicity (Figure 7) and the frequency of diverse expressions used in classroom assignments (Figure 8). The NSSE results indicate that first year students’ responses range between “sometimes” and “often,” with scores hovering between 2.5 and 3.0, and increasing as the FYS program developed. However, the NSSE results for the race and ethnicity question shows a decrease from freshman to senior year after the full implementation of FYS in 2009 (Figure 7).
FIGURE 7: To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills and personal development in understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds?
This indicates that the efforts encouraging racial and ethnic understanding initiated in the first year need stronger emphasis as students continue with their SU education. This will be addressed in other General Education classes within the same domain as FYS (see section IV).
-7-
Nonetheless, the decreased trend – senior year is not consistent among all the NSSE questions. As noted below in Figure 8, students reported including diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments more often in their senior year than they reported including diverse perspectives in the classroom as freshman.
FIGURE 8: First Year to Senior Comparison: In your experience at your institution, about how often have you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, spiritual beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments
The impact of FYS is evident with the trend growing from 2.61 [after we introduced the pilot in 2008] to a high of 2.87 in 2011, and dipping slightly to a 2.78 in 2012.
IV: A Reflection on What the Institution Has Learned and Where We Go From Here
Shenandoah University has cultivated a learning environment within the QEP over the past five years that encourages students to become global citizens. The QEP has become a model of success within the General Education curriculum. Subsequently, the University is part of a consortium of five institutions awarded a 30 month grant from the Teagle Foundation (starting January 2015). The grant, “The C5 Consortium for a More Compelling and Coherent Liberal Arts Curriculum” supports SU’s initiative to expand the QEP/FYS community and co-curricular model to other domains within the General Education program. The “Individual in the World” domain will be one of the first developed where current FYS Global co-curricular programming will become integrated into all the courses offered in this domain, addressing the need for an academic global emphasis that extends beyond the freshman seminar. The one area where the QEP has not made an impact, the area of religious tolerance, will be addressed further within the General Education curriculum, specifically the “Moral Reasoning” domain where many of our religion courses are offered. Co-curricular programming specifically addressing religious tolerance will be embedded within the General Education Moral Reasoning domain. Our QEP revealed that incorporating co-curricular programming into the assessment process effectively unifies diverse content and will be developed further and expanded to the entire General Education program one domain at a time.
-8-
-9-
-10-